Harris vs Trump;

[Luc Turpin]

Early Voting Trends in Some Key Battleground States

Apart from actual poling, early voting trends may be helpful in giving us a slight insight into what might be actually playing out in this 2024 U.S. election. Here is a bit of information that may or may not be revealing anything.

Note: Grant you that this is as good as holding up a crystal ball to the light, but fun to do.

General

New voters in many of the seven closest battlegrounds exceeds the 2020 margin.

Pennsylvania

Warning signs for Trump – more women have voted early than men in the 2024 election, and registered Democrats aged over 65 have so far also outvoted Republicans in the same age group – Politico

https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-bad-news-pennsylvania-early-voting-harris-1978491

Female Democrats dominate new voter numbers

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/early-voting-data-shows-new-voters-group-swing-election-rcna178187

Gorgia

Early voting usually favours Democrats – 4 Million early voters in comparison to 2.7 Million in 2020.

https://sos.ga.gov/news/georgia-voters-break-4-million-votes-during-early-voting-period

Michigan

41% of registered voters have already voted. 13% are first time voters. Modeling suggest Democratic women are slightly outpacing Republican women while Republican men are nearly doubling the number of new Democratic men.

https://www.michigan.gov/sos/elections/election-results-and-data/voter-participation-dashboard

Arizona

Male republicans lead the way in new voters voting early

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/early-voting-data-shows-new-voters-group-swing-election-rcna178187

Nevada

Of the more than 542,000 early in person voters, 45.5% were Republicans, and 27.7% were Democrats.

Of 483,171 mail ballots received as of Friday, 40.2% were sent by Democrats, 30.3% by Republicans, and 29.4% by others.

https://nevadacurrent.com/2024/11/02/as-early-in-person-voting-ends-democrats-are-left-with-a-lot-of-work-to-do/

[iNow]

20 minutes ago, Luc Turpin said:

early voting trends may be helpful in giving us a slight insight into what might be actually playing out

Not really, no. Early voting trends only give insights into what early voters are doing and tells little to nothing about the election or potential outcome overall. 

Don’t get caught up trying to read tea leaves and chicken entrails. We’ll know when we know. 

Edited Sunday at 01:38 PM by iNow

[Luc Turpin]

12 minutes ago, iNow said:

Not really, no. Early voting trends only give insights into what early voters are doing and tells little to nothing about the election or potential outcome overall. 

Don’t get caught up trying to read tea leaves and chicken entrails. We’ll know when we know. 

I admit that I am getting caught up in trying to read tea leaves and chicken entrails, and it passes the time until we'll know when we know.

 

[swansont]

Two snippets from social media, about what many pundits and pollsters are doing wrong by downplaying Dobbs. They haven’t acknowledged/adjusted for how skewed their predictions have been since that decision came down.

(paraphrasing)

- Imagine a dozen or so states just outright banned guns. Do you think that wouldn’t continually be at the center of discussion?

- Women are furious

 

 

[TheVat]

2 hours ago, iNow said:

Don’t get caught up trying to read tea leaves and chicken entrails. We’ll know when we know. 

As one who buys coarse loose leaf tea, puts a pinch in a cup and pours boiling water over it, I am one of the few who can read tea leaves.  And my leaves said, the totals for WINVAZ PAGAMINC are not only unknowable at this point but we may have to wait two damn weeks for ##&+)(@!! ing Maricopa County to get their votes counted, so drop a sugar lump in me, big boy, and chill!

[iNow]

I think you should consider a nice herbal or at least decaf. Lol

[Luc Turpin]

18 hours ago, TheVat said:

As one who buys coarse loose leaf tea, puts a pinch in a cup and pours boiling water over it, I am one of the few who can read tea leaves.  And my leaves said, the totals for WINVAZ PAGAMINC are not only unknowable at this point but we may have to wait two damn weeks for ##&+)(@!! ing Maricopa County to get their votes counted, so drop a sugar lump in me, big boy, and chill!

No, no, no, not slow vote counting Maricopa County again!

A Clinton-Trump or Biden-Trump finish on when a final verdict is available?

The latter appears more probable than the former.

Edited 22 hours ago by Luc Turpin

[Luc Turpin]

The Iowa shocker!

Harris leading Trump 47-44% in red state Iowa

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/harris-tops-trump-latest-iowa-poll-marking-turnaround-des-moines-register-survey-2024-11-03/

[dimreepr]

1 hour ago, Luc Turpin said:

The Iowa shocker!

Harris leading Trump 47-44% in red state Iowa

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/harris-tops-trump-latest-iowa-poll-marking-turnaround-des-moines-register-survey-2024-11-03/

All we know is, the news is winning making a profit...

Edited 19 hours ago by dimreepr

[Luc Turpin]

10 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

All we know is, the news is winning making a profit...

And I remember aggregate Florida polls stating that Democrats had a chance at it in 2020 and it was a Republican win.

"Before the election, aggregate polls had Biden in the lead in Florida by 1 to 3 percentage points. Despite this, Trump won by a 3.4-point margin, improving on his margin from 2016 by 2.2 points."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_United_States_presidential_election_in_Florida#:~:text=Before the election%2C aggregate polls,election in Florida since 2004.

 

[swansont]

17 minutes ago, Luc Turpin said:

And I remember aggregate Florida polls stating that Democrats had a chance at it in 2020 and it was a Republican win.

"Before the election, aggregate polls had Biden in the lead in Florida by 1 to 3 percentage points. Despite this, Trump won by a 3.4-point margin, improving on his margin from 2016 by 2.2 points."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_United_States_presidential_election_in_Florida#:~:text=Before the election%2C aggregate polls,election in Florida since 2004.

 

Meaningless numbers without citing an actual error margin for the polls, and how this aggregate was determined, since polls vary in quality.

A final margin of 3.4 when the prediction is e.g. 3 +/- 1 is utterly unsurprising

[TheVat]

1 hour ago, Luc Turpin said:

The Iowa shocker!

Harris leading Trump 47-44% in red state Iowa

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/harris-tops-trump-latest-iowa-poll-marking-turnaround-des-moines-register-survey-2024-11-03/

It's an outlier poll, unfortunately.  Other Iowa polls are showing them about even or Trump up a point.  

[iNow]

11 minutes ago, TheVat said:

It's an outlier poll, unfortunately.  Other Iowa polls are showing them about even or Trump up a point.  

You're not wrong that other polls have different narratives around Trumps position in Iowa and I'm certainly not hanging my hat on this one.

In fact, I fully expect Trump to carry Iowa despite my and my friends best efforts, but what this poll DOES show is that the nearly 20 point lead Trump had in Iowa circa July has not only shrunk significantly, but effectively been eliminated and become a virtual tie.

This aligns with trends coming from the Cook Political report where Iowa went from Likely Republican to Lean Republican to now Toss-Up.

The bigger story here IMO is how this Iowa poll suggests likely weakness in other rural counties in places like Wisconsin and Michigan, potentially even Pennsylvania (though I'm doubtful on this last one). Given Trumps consistently low ceiling, weakness in any of these places amplifies the risk to his chances. 

This particular poll, while being an outlier and different from other good ones, does have the benefit of coming from Anne Seltzer who is fairly universally seen as one of (if not THE) best pollster in the US. Not decisive, but a big part of the reason it's getting so much traction. 

[TheVat]

2 minutes ago, iNow said:

The bigger story here IMO is how this Iowa poll suggests likely weakness in other rural counties in places like Wisconsin and Michigan, potentially even Pennsylvania (though I'm doubtful on this last one). Given Trumps consistently low ceiling, weakness in any of these places amplifies the risk to his chances. 

This particular poll, while being an outlier and different from other good ones, does have the benefit of coming from Anne Seltzer who is fairly universally seen as one of (if not THE) best pollster in the US. Not decisive, but a big part of the reason it's getting so much traction. 

You've dialed back my nervousness a bit, thank you.  Or maybe it was the herbal tea you recommended.  (with a shot of Seltzer, ha!)

[iNow]

<groan> lol

[Luc Turpin]

Interesting!

Electoral votes counting only states where a candidate leads by 3 or more:

226Harris

 

230Trump

 

Electoral votes if current polling translates perfectly to results (it won’t):

251Harris

 

287Trump

 

Electoral votes if state polls miss in the same way they did in 2020:

226Harris

 

312Trump

 

Electoral votes if state polls miss in the same way they did in 2022:

303Harris

 

235Trump

 

Includes polling as of Nov. 3. See the latest polling averages »

[J.C.MacSwell]

I tend to check 538 and find the Democrats holding or very slightly declining, despite hearing more descriptions of Democrats building early leads...probably the way I'm sampling or what I'm clicking but if in fact it's due to GOP putting their finger on the polls should 538 not be adjusting for that?

I predicted Harris would win, almost comfortably, if she ran in a certain way and not only has she done that...but Trump seems to be getting in his own way. I would expect Harris would have a lead nationally of about 4% (and probably need at least 2) but 538 has her lead dwindled to 1.1 after building to over 3 a couple months back.

 

I hope you Americans on this site have already voted but show up tomorrow with a least 3 decent minded friends that might not have voted otherwise...(I do realize I'm preaching to the choir)

[swansont]

From a Michigan pollsterThat now has Harris leading

https://mirs-uploads.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/5931-MI STATEWIDE MITCHELL POLL -FIELD COPY - EXEC SUMMARY - CROSSTABS OF MI 106PM 11-3-24.pdf

“Before polling began, we looked at what we thought would be the likely turnout in 2024. Every poll we conducted --- including this one --- was weighted exactly the same. We weighted party affiliation, gender, age, race, area, and education. It seems clear now that we are under sampling women, African Americans, and the City of Detroit based on absentee ballot returns and early voting.”

[Luc Turpin]

13 minutes ago, swansont said:

From a Michigan pollsterThat now has Harris leading

https://mirs-uploads.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/5931-MI STATEWIDE MITCHELL POLL -FIELD COPY - EXEC SUMMARY - CROSSTABS OF MI 106PM 11-3-24.pdf

“Before polling began, we looked at what we thought would be the likely turnout in 2024. Every poll we conducted --- including this one --- was weighted exactly the same. We weighted party affiliation, gender, age, race, area, and education. It seems clear now that we are under sampling women, African Americans, and the City of Detroit based on absentee ballot returns and early voting.”

A 2% percent spread on a 4% percent margin of error with a .007% response rate; not sure that this would be indicative of anything! Except a toss-up.

Edited 15 hours ago by Luc Turpin

[MigL]

There had been reports as far as 2-3 weeks ago that significant numbers ( up to 10% ) of life-long Republicans were abandoning the party.
Not because the Harris campaign swayed them, but because of Trump's ineptitude, mean disparaging disposition, constant lies, and 'open mouth/insert foot' syndrome.

This last week especially may have handed Kamala Harris the keys to the White House.

[Luc Turpin]

On pole herding and J Ann Selzer's shocking Iowa poll.

"Statistical principles suggest that, if the race is truly tied, most polls should show near ties. But there should also be a fair amount of variation with some polls showing clear leads for either candidate, and we’re getting very few of those this year. “The odds are 1 in 9.5 trillion against at least this many polls showing such a close margin,” Silver wrote."

"But is the herding hurting one candidate more than the other? Both parties have reason to hope the polls are missing support for their side. Republicans’ reason is that pollsters did underestimate support for Trump in 2016 and 2020. That could happen again: New York Times chief polling analyst Nate Cohn wrote Sunday that, in the final Times polls, “white Democrats were 16 percent likelier to respond than white Republicans,” which “raises the possibility that the polls could underestimate” Trump once more."

"Others suspect pollsters have overcorrected to the point they’re now overestimating Trump’s support. The highly respected Iowa pollster J. Ann Selzer shocked the political world Saturday with a poll showing Harris up by 3 in her state, despite the widespread assumption that it was a safe Trump state. Some theorize Selzer has caught on to a shift toward Democrats that other pollsters have missed, but others suspect her poll is just an outlier that won’t actually match the results."

https://www.vox.com/2024-elections/382161/harris-trump-final-polls-2024-who-will-win

[swansont]

28 minutes ago, Luc Turpin said:

A 2% percent spread on a 4% percent margin of error with a .007% response rate; not sure that this would be indicative of anything! Except a toss-up.

You missed the point. It’s not the result, as such, it’s the admission that the model has not been updated i.e. the bit I quoted, and that there’s a rather large shift when it’s corrected. 

[toucana]

13 minutes ago, MigL said:

There had been reports as far as 2-3 weeks ago that significant numbers ( up to 10% ) of life-long Republicans were abandoning the party.
Not because the Harris campaign swayed them, but because of Trump's ineptitude, mean disparaging disposition, constant lies, and 'open mouth/insert foot' syndrome.

This last week especially may have handed Kamala Harris the keys to the White House.

Recent polling analysis by the Harvard Institute of Politics suggests that Kamala Harris is leading by up to 30% amongst younger voters - especially women.

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4953612-harvard-institute-poll-gender-gap-harris-trump/

Amidst reports of half-empty Trump rallies with audience members leaving after just 5 minutes, the inescapable conclusion seems to be that momentum has shifted towards Kamala Harris in the crucial final week before the election on Tuesday.

Critics can point to various factors such as the negative optics of Trump’s October 27 event in Madison Square Gardens which was unpleasantly redolent of the infamous ‘German American Bund’ Nazi rally held there in 1939 - complete with racist insults and overt threats of violence towards their ‘enemies’. Subsequent MAGA attempts to exploit the ‘Garbage’ meme backfired spectacularly when Trump appeared like a senile dustman aboard a garbage truck, and his supporters began dressing in garbage sacks -  which prompted one prominent conservative influencer and former ally Nick Fuentes to denounce MAGA as a cult.

https://www.newsweek.com/nick-fuentes-slams-donald-trump-supporters-it-cult-1979186

But one thing in particular that stands out, was the profound unwisdom of the Trump campaign in allowing some of his most unsavoury affiliates and surrogates to start spitballing in public about what jobs they would take up in a new Trump administration, and which radical agendas they proposed to ‘follow from day one’.

There had already been a certain amount of cautious and reasoned speculation about whom Trump might appoint to his cabinet if he wins  - e.g. this well researched article in Politico.

https://www.politico.com/interactives/2024/potential-cabinets/trump-second-term-cabinet/

All of this however was completely eclipsed by the following garish media events:

- Robert Kennedy Jr announcing that he had been promised control of the Public Health Services, and would begin pulling ‘ineffective’ vaccines from the market. --> https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/rfk-jr-trump-promised-control-public-health-agencies/story?id=115303649

- Elon Musk announcing that he would be put in charge of a ‘Department of Government Efficiency’ -  aka DOGE  (*wink-wink*), and start firing staff and tearing down Federal Government, just like he did at Twitter.--> https://edition.cnn.com/2024/10/22/tech/elon-musk-government-efficiency/index.html

- Aileen Cannon, the Florida district judge being touted by Trump as future Attorney General as a quid pro quo for (temporarily) dismissing the Mar-a-Lago Espionage Act charges against him.--> https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-aileen-cannon-attorney-general-b2634284.html

As US comedian Joey Adams once said - “With friends like these, who needs enemies ?” You could hardly think of anything more likely to focus the minds of voters on the implications and possible consequences of the choices they will make on Tuesday.

[Luc Turpin]

1 hour ago, swansont said:

You missed the point. It’s not the result, as such, it’s the admission that the model has not been updated i.e. the bit I quoted, and that there’s a rather large shift when it’s corrected. 

I got that their model was not updated to keep it a comparison between apples and apples, and that there is under sampling of women, African Americans and the city of Detroit based on abstentee ballot returns and early voting.  But, I don't think that this would bring it beyond the 4% margin of error territory.

[swansont]

47 minutes ago, Luc Turpin said:

I got that their model was not updated to keep it a comparison between apples and apples, and that there is under sampling of women, African Americans and the city of Detroit based on abstentee ballot returns and early voting.  But, I don't think that this would bring it beyond the 4% margin of error territory.

Why not? Any actual analysis to provide?

I mean, it wasn’t me saying this, it was the pollster, who knows the model and the data. You’re claiming they are wrong based on…vibes? Tarot cards? Tea leaves?